<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" version="2.0">
 <channel>
  <title>The Oyez Project: 1957 Term Arguments</title>
  <link>http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1957/</link>
  <description>U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org)</description>
  <language>en-us</language>
  <itunes:image>http://www.oyez.org/images/oyezfeed.jpg</itunes:image>
  <itunes:category text="Government &amp; Organizations"/>
      <itunes:subtitle>U.S. Supreme Court Audio Recordings, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org)</itunes:subtitle>
    
   
    
     
      
       <item>
        <title>Kent v. Dulles (No. 481) - Oral Argument</title>
        <pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 1958 12:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
                <description>&lt;p&gt;Rockwell Kent applied for and was refused a passport to visit England. In addition to informing him that his application refusal rested on his Communist Party affiliations, the Passport Office Director told Kent that in order for a passport to be issued a hearing would be necessary. The Director instructed Kent to submit an affidavit as to whether he was a current or past Communist. Upon the advice of counsel, Kent refused to sign the affidavit but did participate in a hearing at which he was once more asked to sign an affidavit concerning his Communist affiliations. When he refused the affidavit, the Passport Department advised Kent that no further action would be taken on his passport request until he satisfied the affidavit requirement. On appeal from consecutive adverse rulings in both district and appellate court, the Supreme Court granted Kent certiorari.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
        <itunes:summary>&lt;p&gt;Rockwell Kent applied for and was refused a passport to visit England. In addition to informing him that his application refusal rested on his Communist Party affiliations, the Passport Office Director told Kent that in order for a passport to be issued a hearing would be necessary. The Director instructed Kent to submit an affidavit as to whether he was a current or past Communist. Upon the advice of counsel, Kent refused to sign the affidavit but did participate in a hearing at which he was once more asked to sign an affidavit concerning his Communist affiliations. When he refused the affidavit, the Passport Department advised Kent that no further action would be taken on his passport request until he satisfied the affidavit requirement. On appeal from consecutive adverse rulings in both district and appellate court, the Supreme Court granted Kent certiorari.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;p&gt;Could the Executive's Passport Department defer or refuse the issuance of passports to individuals suspected of being Communists or of traveling abroad to further Communist causes?&lt;/p&gt;</itunes:summary>
        <guid>481_19580410-argument</guid>
        <link>http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1957/1957_481/argument/</link>
        <enclosure url="http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1957/1957_481/argument/481_19580410-argument.mp3" length="22119600" type="audio/mpeg"/>
        
        <itunes:keywords>supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist</itunes:keywords>
       </item>
      
      
     
    
   
  
   
    
     
      
       <item>
        <title>NAACP v. Alabama (No. 91) - Oral Argument, Part 1</title>
        <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jan 1958 12:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
                <description>&lt;p&gt;As part of its strategy to enjoin the NAACP from operating, Alabama required it to reveal to the State's Attorney General the names and addresses of all the NAACP's members and agents in the state.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
        <itunes:summary>&lt;p&gt;As part of its strategy to enjoin the NAACP from operating, Alabama required it to reveal to the State's Attorney General the names and addresses of all the NAACP's members and agents in the state.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;p&gt;Did Alabama's requirement violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?&lt;/p&gt;</itunes:summary>
        <guid>91_19580115-lq-argument-1</guid>
        <link>http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1957/1957_91/argument-1/</link>
        <enclosure url="http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1957/1957_91/argument-1/91_19580115-lq-argument-1.mp3" length="0" type="audio/mpeg"/>
        
        <itunes:keywords>supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist</itunes:keywords>
       </item>
      
      
     
    
   
  
   
    
     
      
       <item>
        <title>NAACP v. Alabama (No. 91) - Oral Argument, Part 2</title>
        <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jan 1958 12:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
                <description>&lt;p&gt;As part of its strategy to enjoin the NAACP from operating, Alabama required it to reveal to the State's Attorney General the names and addresses of all the NAACP's members and agents in the state.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
        <itunes:summary>&lt;p&gt;As part of its strategy to enjoin the NAACP from operating, Alabama required it to reveal to the State's Attorney General the names and addresses of all the NAACP's members and agents in the state.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;p&gt;Did Alabama's requirement violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?&lt;/p&gt;</itunes:summary>
        <guid>91_19580116-lq-argument-2</guid>
        <link>http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1957/1957_91/argument-2/</link>
        <enclosure url="http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1957/1957_91/argument-2/91_19580116-lq-argument-2.mp3" length="0" type="audio/mpeg"/>
        
        <itunes:keywords>supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist</itunes:keywords>
       </item>
      
      
     
    
   
  
   
    
     
      
       <item>
        <title>Wiener v. United States (No. 52) - Oral Argument</title>
        <pubDate>Mon, 18 Nov 1957 12:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
                <description>&lt;p&gt;By the War Claims Act of 1948, Congress established the War Claims Commission for the purpose of adjudicating claims for compensating internees, prisoners of war, and religious organizations. Wiener was confirmed as a member of the Commission by President Truman in 1950. In 1953, when President Eisenhower requested Wiener's resignation, Wiener refused. Eisenhower subsequently appointed a substitute to Wiener's post. The Commission was abolished in 1954, and Wiener brought a claim to recover his salary from the time of his removal to the last day of the Commission's existence.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
        <itunes:summary>&lt;p&gt;By the War Claims Act of 1948, Congress established the War Claims Commission for the purpose of adjudicating claims for compensating internees, prisoners of war, and religious organizations. Wiener was confirmed as a member of the Commission by President Truman in 1950. In 1953, when President Eisenhower requested Wiener's resignation, Wiener refused. Eisenhower subsequently appointed a substitute to Wiener's post. The Commission was abolished in 1954, and Wiener brought a claim to recover his salary from the time of his removal to the last day of the Commission's existence.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;&lt;p&gt;Did President Eisenhower have the authority to terminate Wiener's membership on the Commission?&lt;/p&gt;</itunes:summary>
        <guid>52_19571118-argument</guid>
        <link>http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1957/1957_52/argument/</link>
        <enclosure url="http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1957/1957_52/argument/52_19571118-argument.mp3" length="26532333" type="audio/mpeg"/>
        
        <itunes:keywords>supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist</itunes:keywords>
       </item>
      
      
     
    
   
  
 </channel>
</rss>
